What are Johnie Kayes plans for THE WAVE in LA?

[SJFAN]

With the Wave getting a new program director many assume that a format flip is in store for the wave. Will the new program director continue to work with the format or just let it go?

On The Wave website they removed the smooth jazz name. The new slogan is 94.7 The Wave Southern Californias place to relax and unwind.

 

[recto101]

Maybe its Soft Rock on the Wave or Soft R&B are on the Wave.

 

[passtheword]

With the Wave getting a new program director many assume that a format flip is in store for the wave. Will the new program director continue to work with the format or just let it go?

On The Wave website they removed the smooth jazz name. The new slogan is 94.7 The Wave Southern Californias place to relax and unwind.

The fact that the "smooth jazz" moniker has been removed from their website in conjunction with the installation of a new program director speaks volumes...

 

[davideduardo]

Maybe its Soft Rock on the Wave or Soft R&B are on the Wave.

Soft AC, maybe to the lighter, mellower side of KOST would be my bet.

 

[recto101]

Maybe its Soft Rock on the Wave or Soft R&B are on the Wave.

Soft AC, maybe to the lighter, mellower side of KOST would be my bet.

I miss the New Age Music on the NAC's back in the early 1990's to 1996?

 

[Interstate 78]

If you click on station history, it says "The WAVE is Southern California's Smooth Adult Contemporary radio station, playing a mix of vocals with pop instrumentals."

So we can't even say "a mix of vocals and smooth jazz?" Now it's "pop instrumentals?" My God, we've got to avoid using that term jazz like the plague. How sad this format has become.

 

[Carmine5]

So we can't even say "a mix of vocals and smooth jazz?" Now it's "pop instrumentals?" My God, we've got to avoid using that term jazz like the plague. How sad this format has become.

Yeah, pretty soon it will be known as the "J" word and enter the lexicon of the seven deadly words for broadcast radio.

When you think of how popular and influential the Jazz format was back in the 60's and early 70's to what it has become today and how there were stations like KRML who proudly and famously played jazz that have either flipped to something else or are now on the ropes and in the hands of bankers, as is the case with KRML, it makes a music lover weep.

While I don't think there is a "dumbing down" of musical tastes among the public (web radio is proof of that) there is certainly a dumbing down of what we're hearing on broadcast radio.

One day broadcast radio will be known as: the medium with a handful of songs, a half dozen formats.

c5

 

[Interstate 78]

So we can't even say "a mix of vocals and smooth jazz?" Now it's "pop instrumentals?" My God, we've got to avoid using that term jazz like the plague. How sad this format has become.

Yeah, pretty soon it will be known as the "J" word and enter the lexicon of the seven deadly words for broadcast radio.

When you think of how popular and influential the Jazz format was back in the 60's and early 70's to what it has become today and how there were stations like KRML who proudly and famously played jazz that have either flipped to something else or are now on the ropes and in the hands of bankers, as is the case with KRML, it makes a music lover weep.

While I don't think there is a "dumbing down" of musical tastes among the public (web radio is proof of that) there is certainly a dumbing down of what we're hearing on broadcast radio.

One day broadcast radio will be known as: the medium with a handful of songs, a half dozen formats.

c5

You're right. Almost everyone I talk to says "thank God for web radio, I-Pods, satellite radio, etc." because there's nothing decent on regular radio. My one colleague has a theory that regular radio from here on out will only be here to serve the lowest common denominator of listeners with the most bland, across the board, generic pop music available. If you want something more, you'll have to pay for it. Think of it as the soup kitchen of radio. You get your free basics of soup and water at the soup kitchen, but you have to pay if you want decent food. The same with radio.

 

[davideduardo]

When you think of how popular and influential the Jazz format was back in the 60's and early 70's

Popular and influential? I worked much of the time from 1959 to 1963 at WCUY in Cleveland. The format was 100% jazz. We were able to do the logs once per quarter, since there were no spots at all to put on them. Through the artists and the record and show promoters, we learned that our situation was pretty general, save for a few unique markets.

to what it has become today and how there were stations like KRML who proudly and famously played jazz that have either flipped to something else or are now on the ropes and in the hands of bankers, as is the case with KRML, it makes a music lover weep.

KRML never had much beyond insignificant ratings. It was a daytimer, on a high frequency, that became famous mostly due to the move which was set in their studios.

While I don't think there is a "dumbing down" of musical tastes among the public (web radio is proof of that) there is certainly a dumbing down of what we're hearing on broadcast radio.

During the same period, in Cleveland, no FM ever made the ratings. On the other hand, the AM band did fine, and there were 2 r&b stations, 3 Top 40's and 3 MOR's at any time. Three total formats.

One day broadcast radio will be known as: the medium with a handful of songs, a half dozen formats.

CHR is again evolving into a broader, mass appeal format bit by bit. While different stations will differentiate themselves based on details, there really are only a few viable formats in any market, multiplied by various kinds of packaging and ingredients... sort of like breakfast cereals.

 

[Carmine5]

When you think of how popular and influential the Jazz format was back in the 60's and early 70's

Popular and influential? I worked much of the time from 1959 to 1963 at WCUY in Cleveland. The format was 100% jazz. We were able to do the logs once per quarter, since there were no spots at all to put on them. Through the artists and the record and show promoters, we learned that our situation was pretty general, save for a few unique markets.

to what it has become today and how there were stations like KRML who proudly and famously played jazz that have either flipped to something else or are now on the ropes and in the hands of bankers, as is the case with KRML, it makes a music lover weep.

KRML never had much beyond insignificant ratings. It was a daytimer, on a high frequency, that became famous mostly due to the move which was set in their studios.

While I don't think there is a "dumbing down" of musical tastes among the public (web radio is proof of that) there is certainly a dumbing down of what we're hearing on broadcast radio.

During the same period, in Cleveland, no FM ever made the ratings. On the other hand, the AM band did fine, and there were 2 r&b stations, 3 Top 40's and 3 MOR's at any time. Three total formats.

One day broadcast radio will be known as: the medium with a handful of songs, a half dozen formats.

CHR is again evolving into a broader, mass appeal format bit by bit. While different stations will differentiate themselves based on details, there really are only a few viable formats in any market, multiplied by various kinds of packaging and ingredients... sort of like breakfast cereals.

God save us from the mind-numbing quibbling of the old pontificating padre of radio.

KRML was already well known in the jazz community through its promotion and support of the famous Monterrey Jazz Festival since its inception in 1958. As a long time resident of Carmel, Clint Eastwood, himself a jazz affectionado and a festival board member, was a listener and used the station for his film.

As for jazz radio's influence, I know of many L.A. session musicians who, in their young years, listened for hours to KBCA and KNOB with the famous Sleepy Stein and were influenced by the music. I have no doubt that a similar influence on future musicians, aided by other jazz stations, was being repeated in cities all across the country.

24-hour jazz radio wasn't just about ratings and revenue then (although, at one point, L.A. did have two jazz format stations in the 60's), it went beyond that.

c5

 

[AM FM listener]

Jazz's popularity peaked during the swing era. Since then, it has been a niche format. Smooth Jazz gave the jazz genre a boost for a couple of decades, exposing jazz to a more mainstream audience, but now that appears to be fading, too. I expect The Wave will evolve to Soft AC first and then Mainstream AC.

 

[recto101]

Look theres a website that is saving the WAVE's original Format www.wavjazz.net. The original WAVE was New Age, Chill and Smooth Jazz. Nows its the Quiet storm and Soft Rock like KOIT in SF. Smooth Jazz will fade from 94.7 The wave soon like Smooth Jazz faded from KBLX in SF.

 

[davideduardo]

God save us from the mind-numbing quibbling of the old pontificating padre of radio.

I'm just trying to separate reality from fantasy.

KRML was already well known in the jazz community through its promotion and support of the famous Monterrey Jazz Festival since its inception in 1958.

Fact: KRML was a 500 watt daytimer on 1410. The signal went about 10 to 15 miles.

Fact: KRML benefited from the festival, but the festival did not benefit from the station.

As a long time resident of Carmel, Clint Eastwood, himself a jazz affectionado and a festival board member, was a listener and used the station for his film.

Fact: The station benefited, minimally, from the film. The film did not benefit from the station other than it being a convenient set location.

As for jazz radio's influence, I know of many L.A. session musicians who, in their young years, listened for hours to KBCA and KNOB with the famous Sleepy Stein and were influenced by the music.

Fact: radio, and the stations you mention, are commercial operations... businesses. The influence of jazz radio on listeners was minimal, as few got ratings, and then, low ratings. To say that musicians were influenced by those stations is a leap of faith and would have to be put in the context of the influence of nurture, education, relationships with other musicians, etc.

I have no doubt that a similar influence on future musicians, aided by other jazz stations, was being repeated in cities all across the country.

Fact: the purpose of investing in or building a station is not altruism. It is, like any other business, to make some money. Otherwise, it would be said that "I paíd $25,000,000 for a station in the hopes that the next Carrie Underwood might be listening." Yeah, right.

24-hour jazz radio wasn't just about ratings and revenue then (although, at one point, L.A. did have two jazz format stations in the 60's), it went beyond that.

Facct. In the 60's most markets had either no ratings for any FMs, or almost ground clutter level numbers for a few. Most were doing one of two things: retaining the license in case FM caught on, or trying to make a meager income off a very niche format. Jazz stations came in both of those flavors.

Fact: When FM started to get listeners after the 1967 simulcast drop dead date, it got listeners due to new formats, mostly rock and beautiful music. Most jazz stations switched in that immediate period.

 

[AC Tones]

Look theres a website that is saving the WAVE's original Format www.wavjazz.net. The original WAVE was New Age, Chill and Smooth Jazz. Nows its the Quiet storm and Soft Rock like KOIT in SF. Smooth Jazz will fade from 94.7 The wave soon like Smooth Jazz faded from KBLX in SF.

I am doing my best to be true to the founding principles of the format by incorporating programming strategies of So Cal terrestrial pioneers like KIFM and the old KTWV, and KKSF, and later, the satellite-delivered format of Jones Radio Networks. Like I have said before, with little or no overhead, I have the luxury to put together a playlist that is largely instrumental, minimizing Soft A/C and crossover vocals. Thanks again for listening.

 

[Carmine5]

God save us from the mind-numbing quibbling of the old pontificating padre of radio.

I'm just trying to separate reality from fantasy.

KRML was already well known in the jazz community through its promotion and support of the famous Monterrey Jazz Festival since its inception in 1958.

Fact: KRML was a 500 watt daytimer on 1410. The signal went about 10 to 15 miles.

Fact: KRML benefited from the festival, but the festival did not benefit from the station.

As a long time resident of Carmel, Clint Eastwood, himself a jazz affectionado and a festival board member, was a listener and used the station for his film.

Fact: The station benefited, minimally, from the film. The film did not benefit from the station other than it being a convenient set location.

As for jazz radio's influence, I know of many L.A. session musicians who, in their young years, listened for hours to KBCA and KNOB with the famous Sleepy Stein and were influenced by the music.

Fact: radio, and the stations you mention, are commercial operations... businesses. The influence of jazz radio on listeners was minimal, as few got ratings, and then, low ratings. To say that musicians were influenced by those stations is a leap of faith and would have to be put in the context of the influence of nurture, education, relationships with other musicians, etc.

I have no doubt that a similar influence on future musicians, aided by other jazz stations, was being repeated in cities all across the country.

Fact: the purpose of investing in or building a station is not altruism. It is, like any other business, to make some money. Otherwise, it would be said that "I paíd $25,000,000 for a station in the hopes that the next Carrie Underwood might be listening." Yeah, right.

24-hour jazz radio wasn't just about ratings and revenue then (although, at one point, L.A. did have two jazz format stations in the 60's), it went beyond that.

Facct. In the 60's most markets had either no ratings for any FMs, or almost ground clutter level numbers for a few. Most were doing one of two things: retaining the license in case FM caught on, or trying to make a meager income off a very niche format. Jazz stations came in both of those flavors.

Fact: When FM started to get listeners after the 1967 simulcast drop dead date, it got listeners due to new formats, mostly rock and beautiful music. Most jazz stations switched in that immediate period.

You're not separating anything but hairs, as in splitting hairs.

Show me where I said KRML "benefited" from the jazz festival or where I said anything regarding the station's signal or reach. I merely said that Jazz fans knew of the station through its association with the festival. That is a FACT.

Show me where I implied that young musicians became such simply by listening to jazz stations without any other influence or that Jazz was such a popular format that stations made money with it. I merely said that at one time L.A. had two jazz stations and that the music these stations played influenced young musicians by exposing them to different artists and styles. That is a FACT.

You obviously don't read other people's posts or you read too much into them (and I'm really trying to be charitable here).

c5

If anyone

 

[davideduardo]

Show me where I said KRML "benefited" from the jazz festival or where I said anything regarding the station's signal or reach. I merely said that Jazz fans knew of the station through its association with the festival. That is a FACT.

But that is not what you said, not what I replied to. The vast and overwhelming bulk of jazz fans outside of the tiny coverage area of 1410 did not know about the station, and the few that went to the festival probably paid little attention to it if they were not from the area... so the festival did not benefit from KRML's existence, involvement or anything else, although KRML probably had it local image enhanced by being part of a major local event.

Show me where I implied that young musicians became such simply by listening to jazz stations without any other influence or that Jazz was such a popular format that stations made money with it. I merely said that at one time L.A. had two jazz stations and that the music these stations played influenced young musicians by exposing them to different artists and styles. That is a FACT.

The fact is that listening to jazz on the radio is not quantifiable in its influence on musicians, as there are many other far more important influences, particularly since jazz FM did not exist during the youth and adolesence of most of those musicians we knew when the stations you mention existed. I'd doubt they had any more influence when those musicians were older, either.

You obviously don't read other people's posts or you read too much into them (and I'm really trying to be charitable here).

No, you are just trying to glorify stations and formats that had nearly no listeners. I worked at one of them, and despite constant visits by Brubeck, Monk, Coltrane, Tjader, Coleman and the rest, the station had next to zero billing. Of course, your intent was to show how much variety radio had then, which it didn't. Most major markets had 3 or 4 different formats that had any ratings, and the significant stations had double digit shares, while the FMs did not show or showed but with microscopic numbers; many of the independents were sustained by SCA use of the SCA's, first authorized around 1955 and the main source of background music in the 60's.

 

[Carmine5]

Show me where I said KRML "benefited" from the jazz festival or where I said anything regarding the station's signal or reach. I merely said that Jazz fans knew of the station through its association with the festival. That is a FACT.

But that is not what you said, not what I replied to. The vast and overwhelming bulk of jazz fans outside of the tiny coverage area of 1410 did not know about the station, and the few that went to the festival probably paid little attention to it if they were not from the area... so the festival did not benefit from KRML's existence, involvement or anything else, although KRML probably had it local image enhanced by being part of a major local event.

Show me where I implied that young musicians became such simply by listening to jazz stations without any other influence or that Jazz was such a popular format that stations made money with it. I merely said that at one time L.A. had two jazz stations and that the music these stations played influenced young musicians by exposing them to different artists and styles. That is a FACT.

The fact is that listening to jazz on the radio is not quantifiable in its influence on musicians, as there are many other far more important influences, particularly since jazz FM did not exist during the youth and adolesence of most of those musicians we knew when the stations you mention existed. I'd doubt they had any more influence when those musicians were older, either.

You obviously don't read other people's posts or you read too much into them (and I'm really trying to be charitable here).

No, you are just trying to glorify stations and formats that had nearly no listeners. I worked at one of them, and despite constant visits by Brubeck, Monk, Coltrane, Tjader, Coleman and the rest, the station had next to zero billing. Of course, your intent was to show how much variety radio had then, which it didn't. Most major markets had 3 or 4 different formats that had any ratings, and the significant stations had double digit shares, while the FMs did not show or showed but with microscopic numbers; many of the independents were sustained by SCA use of the SCA's, first authorized around 1955 and the main source of background music in the 60's.

"probably paid little attention to it", "probably had it local image enhanced by being part.."

Lot of "probably" there, Eduardo. That means you're guessing. You have no idea of what went on. Hell, you weren't even in California. I'm a native Angeleno and have traveled up to the Monterrey Jazz Festival many times. KRML was prominently there as it had been since the festival's inception in 1958. The station even did remotes. So, yes, jazz fans and festival goers well knew of KRML's existence (whether they listened to it or not). The station even had a record label, Black-Hawk Records, and released many recordings of concerts over the years.

As I said, I know and knew (a few are gone now) many L.A. based musicians who listened to KBCA and KNOB among other stations, discovered and dug the music and were influenced by the artists they heard. They bought the albums and studied the techniques of those musicians they admired. That is one way these people grew as musicians--in addition to lessons and schooling. It is no different from any other budding artist who discovers new music on the radio, buys the albums and practices the sound and style of the artists they admire (think of the British artists who were influenced by the Motown sound they heard on radio). Of course, those were the days when radio truly was a place to discover new music, new artists. Today these musicians are in their late 50's and 60's.

"Of course, your intent was to show how much variety radio had then,"

Again you presume and read far too much into what I wrote. I merely said that, at one time in the 60's, L.A. had two jazz stations. If you want to read between that line, knock yourself out. I never said the stations were financially successful because, frankly, I have no idea what those stations were doing monetarily nor was I interested. I suspect you don't know either but are simply attempting to bully me into accepting your point of view.

Look, Eduardo, you might as well give up on this. You are not going to convince me of what I know to be true because I've experienced it in one way or another. I was there, you weren't. All you can do is read and/or guess about it (and lament the fact that you were in Cleveland or wherever the hell you said you worked).

c5

 

[davideduardo]

"Of course, your intent was to show how much variety radio had then,"

Again you presume and read far too much into what I wrote. I merely said that, at one time in the 60's, L.A. had two jazz stations. If you want to read between that line, knock yourself out. I never said the stations were financially successful because, frankly, I have no idea what those stations were doing monetarily nor was I interested. I suspect you don't know either but are simply attempting to bully me into accepting your point of view.

When you think of how popular and influential the Jazz format was back in the 60's and early 70's to what it has become today and how there were stations like KRML who proudly and famously played jazz that have either flipped to something else or are now on the ropes and in the hands of bankers, as is the case with KRML, it makes a music lover weep.

While I don't think there is a "dumbing down" of musical tastes among the public (web radio is proof of that) there is certainly a dumbing down of what we're hearing on broadcast radio. One day broadcast radio will be known as: the medium with a handful of songs, a half dozen formats.

Hmm. First you say that radio will be reduced to a very few formats, and then you say it won't.

Methinks you are hoist on your own petard. And not only do I think that, I just showed, in your own words, that you are contradicting yourself.

I was there, you weren't. All you can do is read and/or guess about it (and lament the fact that you were in Cleveland or wherever the hell you said you worked).

The fact is that neither of those FMs, or any other independent LA FM of the time, was profitable...or popular. The data is not just in the FCC financial reports for the market, but also in the total lack of ratings as well as the extremely low sales prices for those stations when they changed ownership.

And by the middle of that decade, I was neither in Cleveland nor lamenting where I was... I owned one of the few FMs that made money from anything other than SCA services, being part of a church, a hobby or a simulcast.

 

[Carmine5]

"Of course, your intent was to show how much variety radio had then,"

Again you presume and read far too much into what I wrote. I merely said that, at one time in the 60's, L.A. had two jazz stations. If you want to read between that line, knock yourself out. I never said the stations were financially successful because, frankly, I have no idea what those stations were doing monetarily nor was I interested. I suspect you don't know either but are simply attempting to bully me into accepting your point of view.

When you think of how popular and influential the Jazz format was back in the 60's and early 70's to what it has become today and how there were stations like KRML who proudly and famously played jazz that have either flipped to something else or are now on the ropes and in the hands of bankers, as is the case with KRML, it makes a music lover weep.

While I don't think there is a "dumbing down" of musical tastes among the public (web radio is proof of that) there is certainly a dumbing down of what we're hearing on broadcast radio. One day broadcast radio will be known as: the medium with a handful of songs, a half dozen formats.

Hmm. First you say that radio will be reduced to a very few formats, and then you say it won't.

Methinks you are hoist on your own petard. And not only do I think that, I just showed, in your own words, that you are contradicting yourself.

I was there, you weren't. All you can do is read and/or guess about it (and lament the fact that you were in Cleveland or wherever the hell you said you worked).

The fact is that neither of those FMs, or any other independent LA FM of the time, was profitable...or popular. The data is not just in the FCC financial reports for the market, but also in the total lack of ratings as well as the extremely low sales prices for those stations when they changed ownership.

And by the middle of that decade, I was neither in Cleveland nor lamenting where I was... I owned one of the few FMs that made money from anything other than SCA services, being part of a church, a hobby or a simulcast.

I've always maintained that the variety of broadcast radio formats is dwindling and have never deviated from that observation. Obviously, you believe otherwise and that is your privilege.

I think the only thing we will ever agree on is the emerging importance of internet radio since you have made comments to that effect elsewhere.
c5

 

[AnotherCat]

Former smooth jazzers are evolving into an A/C format for listeners who think mainstream A/C is too "hard" (eek!).. that would seem to be where the Wave is going

I have always liked the term "pop instrumental" I think it was originally coined by Koz who has managed to override the relaxation mandate and record some uptempo songs that actually got airplay, and Warren Hill has used the term in discussing his music. Don't think it's an accurate description of the instrumentals the WAVE will be playing though: "Lite instrumentals" or "EZ instrumentals" would be more descriptive.